Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33752673›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2021

Community acceptance of reactive focal mass drug administration and reactive focal vector control using indoor residual spraying, a mixed-methods study in Zambezi region, Namibia.

Kathryn W Roberts, Cara Smith Gueye, Kimberly Baltzell, Henry Ntuku, Patrick McCreesh, Alysse Maglior, Brooke Whittemore, Petrina Uusiku, Davis Mumbengegwi, Immo Kleinschmidt and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Kathryn W RobertsMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA. roberts.kathryn@gmail.com.
Cara Smith GueyeMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Kimberly BaltzellMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Henry NtukuMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Patrick McCreeshDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, TX, Dallas, USA.
Alysse MagliorMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Brooke WhittemoreDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, TX, Dallas, USA.
Petrina UusikuNational Vectorborne Diseases Control Programme, Namibia Ministry of Health and Social Services, Windhoek, Namibia.
Davis MumbengegwiMultidisciplinary Research Centre, University of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia.
Immo KleinschmidtWits Research Institute for Malaria, Wits/SAMRC Collaborating Centre for Multi-Disciplinary Research on Malaria, School of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Roly GoslingMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Michelle S HsiangMalaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California, (UCSF), 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA. michelle.hsiang@utsouthwestern.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1217-2742
University of Namibia · NAThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USMinistry of Health and Social Services · NASouth African Medical Research Council · ZASouthwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R010161/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Namibia, as in many malaria elimination settings, reactive case detection (RACD), or malaria testing and treatment around index cases, is a standard intervention. Reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA), or treatment without testing, and reactive focal vector control (RAVC) in the form of indoor residual spraying, are alternative or adjunctive interventions, but there are limited data regarding their community acceptability.

methodsA parent trial aimed to compare the effectiveness of rfMDA versus RACD, RAVC versus no RAVC, and rfMDA + RAVC versus RACD only. To assess acceptability of these interventions, a mixed-methods study was conducted using key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) in three rounds (pre-trial and in years 1 and 2 of the trial), and an endline survey.

resultsIn total, 17 KIIs, 49 FGDs were conducted with 449 people over three annual rounds of qualitative data collection. Pre-trial, community members more accurately predicted the level of community acceptability than key stakeholders. Throughout the trial, key participant motivators included: malaria risk perception, access to free community-based healthcare and IRS, and community education by respectful study teams. RACD or rfMDA were offered to 1372 and 8948 individuals in years 1 and 2, respectively, and refusal rates were low (< 2%). RAVC was offered to few households (n = 72) in year 1. In year 2, RAVC was offered to more households (n = 944) and refusals were < 1%. In the endline survey, 94.3% of 2147 respondents said they would participate in the same intervention again.

conclusionsCommunities found both reactive focal interventions and their combination highly acceptable. Engaging communities and centering and incorporating their perspectives and experiences during design, implementation, and evaluation of this community-based intervention was critical for optimizing study engagement.

Indexed as

Mosquito VectorsCommunity ParticipationMass Drug AdministrationMosquito ControlNamibiaPatient Acceptance of Health CareCommunity acceptabilityIndoor residual sprayingMalariaMalaria eliminationMass drug administrationNamibiaPlasmodium falciparumQualitative and Mixed MethodsReactive case detection

Identifiers

PMID33752673
PMCPMC7986500
OpenAlexW3126530550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.